Randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for measuring causal effects. However, they are often not always feasible, and causal treatment effects must be estimated from observational data. Observational studies do not allow robust conclusions about causal relationships unless statistical techniques account for the imbalance of pretreatment confounders across groups while key assumptions hold. Propensity score and balance weighting (PSBW) are useful techniques that aim to reduce the imbalances between treatment groups by weighting the groups to look alike on the observed confounders. There are many methods available to estimate PSBW. However, it is unclear a priori which will achieve the best trade-off between covariate balance and effective sample size. Moreover, it is critical to assess the validity of key assumptions required for robust estimation of the needed treatment effects, including the overlap and no unmeasured confounding assumptions. We present a step-by-step guide to covariate balancing strategies, including how to evaluate overlap, obtain estimates of PSBW, check for covariate balance, and assess sensitivity to unobserved confounding. We compare the performance of several estimation methods using a case study examining the relative effectiveness of substance use treatment programs and provide a user-friendly web application that can implement the proposed steps.
翻译:由自主控制的试验是衡量因果关系的黄金标准,然而,它们往往不总是可行的,因果关系必须从观察数据中估计。观察研究不允许就因果关系得出稳健的结论,除非统计技术考虑到各群体预处理缺陷者之间的不平衡,而关键假设却可以维持。 分数分数和平衡加权(PSBW)是有用的技术,目的是通过权衡各群体对观察到的混结者的影响来减少各治疗群体之间的不平衡。有许多方法可以估计PSBW。然而,对于在共变平衡与有效抽样规模之间实现最佳平衡的先验性并不清楚。此外,评估对所需治疗效果进行稳健估计所需的关键假设的有效性至关重要,包括重叠和无非计量的混杂假设。我们提出了一个逐步平衡战略指南,包括如何评价重叠、获得PSBW的估计数、核对共变平衡、评估未观察到的敏感度。我们比较了几种估计方法的绩效,我们用案例研究来评估了各种关键假设的有效性,以稳健的网络使用方案,并提供了一种用户应用的拟议步骤。